From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2019 18:42:36 -0400
Message-ID: <28926.1556664156@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28313.1556663080@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <BC406D10-146C-4495-AC5E-492CADBFA144@anarazel.de>
<26528.1556599820@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430070552.jzqgcy4ihalx7nur@alap3.anarazel.de>
<30579.1556639470@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430173457.pg6i6urvevse5jer@alap3.anarazel.de>
<29546.1556647550@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430182741.s6o7mo5ebmgxxi5x@alap3.anarazel.de>
<16277.1556649660@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430190308.kga2z5oz7vab7w22@alap3.anarazel.de>
<17996.1556651503@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20190430221045.6slpi2vm2noda5jb@alap3.anarazel.de>
<28313.1556663080@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water ...
markhor just reported in with results showing that we have worse
problems than deadlock-prone tests in the back branches: 9.4
for example looks like
--
-- whole tables
REINDEX TABLE pg_class; -- mapped, non-shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX TABLE pg_index; -- non-mapped, non-shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX TABLE pg_operator; -- non-mapped, non-shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX TABLE pg_database; -- mapped, shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX TABLE pg_shdescription; -- mapped, shared non-critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
-- Check that individual system indexes can be reindexed. That's a bit
-- different from the entire-table case because reindex_relation
-- treats e.g. pg_class special.
REINDEX INDEX pg_class_oid_index; -- mapped, non-shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX INDEX pg_class_relname_nsp_index; -- mapped, non-shared, non-critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX INDEX pg_index_indexrelid_index; -- non-mapped, non-shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX INDEX pg_index_indrelid_index; -- non-mapped, non-shared, non-critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX INDEX pg_database_oid_index; -- mapped, shared, critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
REINDEX INDEX pg_shdescription_o_c_index; -- mapped, shared, non-critical
+ ERROR: could not read block 0 in file "base/16384/27769": read only 0 of 8192 bytes
No doubt this is triggered by CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS.
Given this, I'm rethinking my position that we can dispense with these
test cases. Let's try putting them in a standalone test script, and
see whether that leads to failures or not. Even if it does, we'd
better keep them until we've got a fully clean bill of health from
the buildfarm.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andres@anarazel.de, michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: REINDEX INDEX results in a crash for an index of pg_class since 9.6
In-Reply-To: <28926.1556664156@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox